Memeorandum

August 04, 2012

Saturday Morning At The Olympics

The Olympics, she said, have taught her so much. “I had a few times where it’s hard not just to sit down and go, ‘I’m exhausted, I’m so tired,’ ” she said. “Those are the times when it’s most important to keep a smile on your face. To get up and say, ‘You know what, so many people would kill for this opportunity.’ ”

Franklin’s ambitious program taxes her facial muscles most of all because racing and talking about racing make her smile.

“Her personality is contagious,” [Amerivan bronze medalist] Beisel said. “In the ready room, I was pretty nervous. Just watching her have so much fun, it helped me relax, and I want to really thank her for that. She’s awesome.”

To lighten the mood, Franklin told Beisel to think about the fast-food meals that await them at the end of the meet. She smiled, she danced, she laughed, and Beisel smiled and danced and laughed with her. They spoke as if the United States team were one big “Glee” cast, leading [Russian silver medalist] Zueva to say, through an interpreter, “We didn’t have such great fun on the Russian team.”

How about that 15 year old Levecky winning the 800? And has anyone caught Missy Franklin not smiling? But for the Gator Nation out there nothing beats Abby Waumbach scoring her 4th goal of the games as the girls go 3 zip and face Canada for the quarter-finals.

I have to admit, I went and browsed google pics to try and find one without her smiling. The only ones are when she's in the heat of competition and when she's crying on the medal podium. Literally. Not even a pic of her at say a press conference or something contemplating a question. Or

Having now viewed hundreds of pics of her, I have to say: Love love love her smile.

I have a thing for smiles. Joyous smiles. Certain people just have "it" when it comes to that contagious smile that radiates joy.

Missy has it. Michelle Jenneke has it. And Rachel of CFA fame has it. Just to name a few recent people who have brightened my day just by being smilers.

I sat in a sound truck that was part of the crew of "the agony of defeat" years ago during the Pendleton Round Up and saw how that show was put together. Jim McKay was there doing the interviews. It was quite a thrill to hang out with those people.

I just want to thank everyone for the support I have gotten on the blog. Just an update, as teachers are going to summer training getting ready for the Common Core implementation this school year, many are not liking what they are hearing. All the summer traffic though makes me much easier to find. So now I can use the searches which are pretty specific to know what is being said in various prof devt sessions without actually being there. For example, have had the same troubling search 2 days in a row. Another just came in with "education not about 3 r's but development of personality."

Right now we are less surprised on what is going on than the teachers are apparently.

On the Olympics when we were watching the diving Red commented on how robotic the Chinese athletes were. A culture that devalues individuality comes in handy I suppose when what is being measured is compliance.

Did you guys see how India totally destroyed South Africa in tiddly winks yesterday? I couldn't watch toward the end. Johnson was sitting there in stunned silence as Sivapuja eviscerated him with every tiddle in the last round. It was so painful to watch I had to look away.

A 20 point plus enthusiasm gap like RAS is detecting is NOT going to produce a D + 3 voter turnout population.

If RAS currently has self ID at R + .9, the enthusiasm gap is going to drive it higher than that. I have thought R + 2 was a decent prediction, but I am starting to wonder if even that is too conservative. You dont stand in line for a hour to big a chicken sandwich to register your displeasure with Democrats like Rahm acting like a fascist dictator, and not vote. How many of the the Kiss In protests had more protestors than reporters? The biggest one I saw ( a small sample to be sure I could not have cared less ) had about 15 people.

Go look at the turnout model in Wisconsin a nominally blue state with the Union doing everything they could think of to fluff turnout of Democrats and they lost by more than the original vote that put Walker into office.

Its gonna be ugly to be a prog. Expect some acting out like spoiled little brats after the election. Probably take all the W off the keyboards again...

This morning's WSJ is a fascinating read. Front pge is the Department of Justice's announcement of an investigation into money laundering by Sands Corp.

You know, the casino company owned by Sheldon Adelson, the Republicans biggest backer. "Prosecutors seek to make test case of casino giant controlled by big GOP donor". I truly want to see Eric Holder and his boss in prison.

In the back is an article on Martin Peretz and his breach with Obama on foreign policy, which goes from the farce at the UN to Egypt to Africa to Israel.

The phrase "I think Obama is a child, or maybe let's say grandchild, of the New Left, with casual moral judgments made about very intricate ethical alternatives" really struck me.

The emperor and his claque are being exposed for the scum that they are to just about anyone with a shred of honesty.

Gallup gives you Zero's job approval by State with ADULTS ( NOT RV and most definitely not LV ) and guess what, places chocked full of stupid progs love him. But scan down the list starting at 50% approval which is Minnesota and realize from that point on his has to convince a majority who dont approve of his job performance to both show up and vote for him. Take a look. There is just no way:

matt-I agree. All the horrid plans for that 2nd term are now going to come out this fall before the election which is not what bo ever wanted to have happen.

I started on the most integrative document yet this morning. I can take it back to the Annenberg Challenge, through the Future Earth Alliance, and into the Oval Office.

Kurtz book gave me some more ideas of places to look and build on. Can you say "First and foremost we need a transformation at the level of individual consciousness?" That was after saying distributive justice was not enough.

Well you can scan that Gallup list of underwater states and use the reasoning power that the good lord gave you, or you can just accept the Quinny poll with + 8 or more Democrat samples. One way you will not be shocked on November 7th the other should mean you have your cardiologist on speed dial.

The Ras Partisan ID for July '10 was 33.8%R, 35%D versus the current 34.9%R, 34%D. The Congressional election split in '10 was 51.4%R, 44.8%D. The August Ras ID splits in '04 and '08 were 35.1%R, 37.7%D and 33.2%R, 38.9%D, respectively. The November '08 split was 33.8%R, 41.4%D.

At one point President Obama had driven away 25.6% of those willing to identify themselves as Democrats at the time of his election. The percentage now stands at 18.7%.

I believe the President to be completely capable of driving the Dem ID departure percentage back above 25% prior to the election but even if he doesn't, he still loses.

The Ras Partisan ID for July '10 was 33.8%R, 35%D versus the current 34.9%R, 34%D. The Congressional election split in '10 was 51.4%R, 44.8%D. The August Ras ID splits in '04 and '08 were 35.1%R, 37.7%D and 33.2%R, 38.9%D, respectively. The November '08 split was 33.8%R, 41.4%D.

At one point President Obama had driven away 25.6% of those willing to identify themselves as Democrats at the time of his election. The percentage now stands at 18.7%.

I believe the President to be completely capable of driving the Dem ID departure percentage back above 25% prior to the election but even if he doesn't, he still loses.

Sorry this is so long, but the only link is to Facebook, and it is too good to not post:

Lee Iacocca Says:

'Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage with this so called president? We should be screaming bloody murder! We've got a gang of tax cheating clueless leftists t
rying to steer our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even run a ridiculous cash-for-clunkers program without losing $26 billion of the taxpayers' money, much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, 'trust me, the economy is getting better..' Better? You've got to be kidding. This is America , not the damned 'Titanic'. I'll give you a sound bite: 'Throw all the Democrats out, along with Obama!'

You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore..

The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs.. While we're fiddling in Afghanistan , Iran is completing their nuclear bombs and missiles and nobody seems to know what to do. And the liberal press is waving 'pom-poms' instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of the ' America ' my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for. I've had enough. How about you?

I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. The Biggest 'C' is Crisis! (Iacocca elaborates on nine C's of leadership, with crisis being the first.)

Leaders are made, not born. Leadership is forged in times of crisis. It's easy to sit there with thumb up your butt and talk theory. Or send someone else's kids off to war when you've never seen a battlefield yourself. It's another thing to lead when your world comes tumbling down.

On September 11, 2001, we needed a strong leader more than any other time in our history. We needed a steady hand to guide us out of the ashes. A hell of a mess, so here's where we stand.

We're immersed in a bloody war now with no plan for winning and no plan for leaving.. But our soldiers are dying daily.

We're running the biggest deficit in the history of the world, and it's getting worse every day!

We've lost the manufacturing edge to Asia , while our once-great companies are getting slaughtered by health care costs.

Gas prices are going to skyrock again, and nobody in power has a lucid plan to open drilling to solve the problem. This country has the largest oil reserves in the WORLD, and we cannot drill for it because the politicians have been bought by the flea-hugging environmentalists.

Our schools are in a complete disaster because of the teachers' union.

Our borders are like sieves and they want to give all illegal's amnesty and free healthcare.

The middle class is being squeezed to death every day.

These are times that cry out for leadership.

But when you look around, you've got to ask: 'Where have all the leaders gone?' Where are the curious, creative communicators? Where are the people of character, courage, conviction, omnipotence, and common sense? I may be a sucker for alliteration, but I think you get the point..

Name me a leader who has a better idea for homeland security than making us take off our shoes in airports and throw away our shampoo?

We've spent billions of dollars building a huge new bureaucracy, and all we know how to do is react to things that have already happened.

Everyone's hunkering down, fingers crossed, hoping the government will make it better for them. Now, that's just crazy.. Deal with life.

Name me an industry leader who is thinking creatively about how we can restore our competitive edge in manufacturing. Who would have believed that there could ever be a time when 'The Big Three' referred to Japanese car companies? How did this happen, and more important, look what Obama did about it!

Name me a government leader who can articulate a plan for paying down the debt, or solving the energy crisis, or managing the health care problem. The silence is deafening. But these are the crises that are eating away at our country and milking the middle class dry.

I have news for the Chicago gangsters in Congress. We didn't elect you to turn this country into a losing European Socialist state. What is everybody so afraid of? That some bonehead on NBC or CNN news will call them a name? Give me a break. Why don't you guys show some spine for a change?

Had Enough? Hey, I'm not trying to be the voice of gloom and doom here. I'm trying to light a fire. I'm speaking out because I have hope - I believe in America .. In my lifetime, I've had the privilege of living through some of America 's greatest moments. I've also experienced some of our worst crises: The 'Great Depression,' 'World War II,' the 'Korean War,' the 'Kennedy Assassination,' the 'Vietnam War,' the 1970's oil crisis, and the struggles of recent years since 9/11.

As I've said before, I put together the bulletin for the boss's church, removing most of the exclamation points and misspellings that are sent to me. For tomorrow's substitute preacher, I wrote a short bio blurb for the top of the order of worship from info he'd emailed me, and sent the whole thing to him for review. Yesterday, he sends back a long paragraph of explanation and the following "suggestion":Today, we welcome to the pulpit the Rev. WP. Originally a United Methodist minister, Rev. P was received in full connection with the SOC of the UCC in 1994, serving (church) in Rowan County and (church) in Greensboro before becoming an Intentional Interim Ministry (IIM) specialist through the Center for Congregational Health in Winston-Salem. He has served four UCC congregations in the SOC as their IIM for the last nine years, including (neighboring church)(2005-2007). He resides in G with his wife, E. I put it in as is and printed it this morning.
I'm wondering if other people have the same reaction I did, and if I should have pared it down again. Guess they'll find out tomorrow if he preaches like he writes.

President Obama’s reelection got a boost Friday from the best monthly jobs report on the U.S. economy since February, something that gave his campaign team more fuel in making their argument that the economy is making steady progress. While the good news was coupled with an uptick in the unemployment rate to 8.3 percent, analysts predicted that if the job numbers—however murky—are maintained over the next several months, Obama is likely to win reelection in November against his opponent Mitt Romney.

As to Peretz, he should have known better. There was no reason for him to have assumed anything else about BO.

You and I have been through discussing the myriad of dumb things that Marty does keeping us from ever giving him unqualified praise for when he gets it right. For example, even though he could see through the transparently empty suit of Kerry, a lot of it was driven by his witless fealty to Manbearpig. Although today's interview showed that in 72 he was smarter than I was by voting for Nixon over McGovern. He was also a bit older than I was, then and now.

And it's not like Mr Wage and Price Controls was an *excellent* choice.

Bryan Brothers win the God in Tennis doubles. LeBron and company get the bejeebers scared out of them and the Men's volleyball team is giving Putin's boys a smacking and the Russkies are supposed to be Numero Uno in the World.....:)

The current Ras ID is 34.9%R, 34%D. There's a slight D uptrend and Mr. Goldilocks Optimum has done absolutely nothing to move the R number. Turning a low political skill oligarch into Mr. Electable is proving to be somewhat more difficult than greasing the skids to the nomination.

I can't get my Thursday interview out of my head. If I could write like you I'd do a long piece about today's reasons for running and qualifications for office. Public service certainly doesn't enter into it. Getting rich and receiving preferential treatment clearly is the primary motivation. Qualifications do not include knowledge of the issues, or ways to solve problems. They only include the ability to seem likable while never committing to anything. Any understanding of the problems facing us must be seen as a detriment.

I dunno, C; anybody with what would seem to have been a functioning cortex could've seen through the JEF's garbage on Israel. I can't give Marty any excuse on that. Unlike Camille Paglia, he doesn't stoop to making excuses for him being surrounded by the wrong people. I like Camille but that is as witless as it gets.

analysts predicted that if the job numbers—however murky—are maintained over the next several months, Obama is likely to win reelection in November against his opponent Mitt Romney.

I wonder if the analysts get their heads out of their butts long enough to get a clue that Obama has become a joke and that a few tenths in the job numbers is only one of a gazillion problems with this administration. He has already lost the white male vote, the white married woman vote, about 20-25% of the AA vote, a good hunk of the Jewish vote, and the youth vote has pretty much evaporated. They won't be there this time around like they were in '08.

Comics are starting to find their cojones and the grumbling is spreading.

But it is his birthday, so, of course, he is treating himself to a rare round of golf to celebrate.

OK, let's talk polling, and let me solicit help from those with knowledge. It seems to me that we're seeing two distinct methods, one of which is very likely to produce an erroneous result, and the other of which will do so if the pollsters make erroneous assumptions.

TYPE A

The pollster samples, say, 1500 voters, asking each one for party ID, then publishes the raw results for presidential preference regardless of whether the party ID responses are wildly out of accord with reality. This seems to be what Quinnipiac does. And yes, for some reason they always seem to find "random" samples of 1500 voters that contain huge pluralities of Democrats.

TYPE B

The pollster takes his sample, but recognizes that any given sample is very likely to contain proportions of R's, D's and I's that are different from what he assumes to be the proportions in the entire universe of voters. To bring the numbers into accord with what he sees as reality, he weights his results so as to reflect the response he would get from the entire universe. In these cases, it seems that the proportions assumed for the universe are wildly unrealistic, in that they assume a turnout model identical to the 2008 election, or other unrealistic model based on God knows what.

Clarice, we've come to the same conclusion as Conrad Black and ask ourselves how reality could have been so perverted. I had young children recording hatred against Nixon in their daily journals for months on end. It was unreal, but we all came to *believe* he was a dirty scoundrel if only because he was a Republican.

She was on the tvs at the pool hall I was playing at on Monday. I paid a little attention, but not much. But there was something about her throwing her opponent around - rather cheerfully (not toward her opponent, but in achieving her goals).

I just saw an article about her, so I went to google images and looked.

You have. Although Type A is rarely done any longer, and hasn't been for decades. Despite the protestations of the Quinnipiac rep on Hugh Hewitt's radio program who claimed "We got what we got and merely reported it," I'm almost positive they weighted the results for that poll too. Gonna go try to find it now.

Reason 1,378,541 (estimated) that I hate typepad. I am refreshing this page every few minutes. I am on top of what's being posted.

Or so I thought. It's happened not a few times that a comment has showed up above the last comment when I refresh.

I never saw TK's comment Ignatz is referencing until he quoted it. It wasn't there before I refreshed -- and I guess it showed up higher in the thread after I refreshed. I had no idea I should be scrolling up to see new comments.

Jane, then get one of those dictation things for your computer. I think they are rather reasonable these days. Talk the story out.(I saw an article just the other day on them but I'll be damned if I can remember where.)

Years ago, I was sent to an RNC course on polling. It was a course designed for in-state polling. Five full days. The only thing I remember is how bored I was, so I give huge kudos to anyone in the biz. Actually, I remember two things, the other is that it is all in the wording of the questions.

I think if I took it now, I would get more out of it. Back then, we spent a whole day on weighting, but no explanation as to what it was. We learned how to apply all kinds of formulas, but never an explanation of what weighting was all about or why and I was too dumb about the subject to know enough on what to ask.

John Podhoretz wrote about polling a few days ago and said it's on its last legs as a political tool. I agree, and awaken each morning with a prayer of thanks I'm no longer in the business.

When I began, unless you got a 50 percent completion rate you specified to your client that the results may be questionable. Nowadays the pollsters I talk with admit they are lucky to get interviews at 10 percent of the numbers they attempt to reach. When you reach only 10 percent, say, you have no idea how accurately they represent the population of interest. Pollsters rarely talk about that, but it's a terrible problem because reliability statistics are based on a high rate of completion.

Further, back when dinosaurs walked the earth, we made three attempts at different times of the day and days of the week to reach each phone number, before seeking a replacement unit. Almost no one does that any longer because it ups the cost of the survey substantially. When a company merely keeps burning through phone numbers (called the go-til-you-get method) you are much more likely to contact the elderly, the lower earners, the larger households with someone always home, etc., etc.

In my state (and likely many others nowadays) there are ethnic obstacles as well. In Hawaii, Japanese are the most avid voters of any segment, but the least likely to give their opinions to a stranger on the telephone.

For all of these reasons and many others, weighting results is a necessity. But choosing the weights is tricky, even if the analysts are pure of heart.

Its my understanding that Obama plans to confiscate all the Olympic medals when the team comes home and melt them down and make smaller medals for all of those that did the hard work that allowed the athletes to win. The road builders, the airport workers, the men who cleaned the gymnasts bathroom, etc. etc.

AB:But choosing the weights is tricky, even if the analysts are pure of heart.

Very true.

I wonder what the percentage of pollsters/polls that navigate the tricky waters by weighting in favor of Republicans is?

Is it greater than zero?

More specifically, what is the history of June/July/August polls in presidential election years in terms of partisan breakdown vs the actual election results?

How many pollsters called it too heavy for Republicans in the summer vs the election?

The stories are that pollsters will release that last poll before an election to get it right for the post-election rankings. And invariably those last polls show some "significant shift" in voters in the last week of the campaign. Is that shift real, or were they just fudging (intentionally or not) the numbers up until that point that had existed all along?

Clarice-I think you are referring to Tom Blumer's story at PJ on a Mac attachment that makes dictation easier.

Jane-your point on what drives politicians to try to get elected now is interesting as the regional equity movement is premised on finding local and state officials that can become amenable to the vision. Some hear economic devt and never focus that it's a euphemism for explicit economic planning. Plus may politicians only know what someone tells them. If they get bad info, esp if it is deliberate bad info to encourage particular actions, quite a few have no ability to recognize it.

I get the flip side. Anger that I understand things accurately that no one ever told me. That's true but I do not go public with those insights until I use it to find an explicit declaration.

I think that's a good thing to look for in a politician-how good will they be in being able to recognize poor advice? At any level.

The overlap between prefixes and zip codes is pretty good. The skill comes in gauging turnout via the intensity modeling. We'll see a big jump in Dem intensity after Labor Day but we'll see the reality of the year long lower Dem intensity on election day. We're also going to see the typical stories on successful Dem registration drives. They don't have a good history of translating into votes unless they involve absentee ballots being filled out in nursing homes - or cemeteries.

But seriously, I don't get why the Republican talking heads aren't making much more of Obamas you didn't build that speech. It wasn't a gaffe, it is the collective philosophy that was ingrained in Obama through his Communist childhood rearing.

And they should be pointing out that he is using as a rationale for confiscating wealth.

To top it off its such a ridiculous argument and Romeny should be comparing it to the Olympics. The althletes didn't build the stadiums, they didn't build the equipment, just like the business owner or restarauntuer didn't build the roads and bridges. But EVERYONE HAD THOSE ROADS AND BRIDGES, everyone had the public accommodations and only some managed to excel and succeed and thrive.

THe government didn't build the internet and turn it over to Bill Gates and Steve Jobs to let just them get rich (although we know the government didn't actually build the internet). They had the same shot as everyone else so they owe nothing additional for their success...especially owe nothing extra to the government.

The government is no more responsible for me egtting to work because it build a road then it is for the guy who uses that road to go kill his ex-girlfriend.

And you notice Obama only wants to 'SHARE THE WEALTH' he doesn't demand to share the sacrifice, or share the debts of the business, or share in a business mans bankruptcy. But if the government is responsible for my success, it would also need to be responsible for my failure and should pay the bills....take a little out of everyones welfare and food stamps and bail me out.

Thanks, AB. One more question if you don't mind; I wasn't sure what you meant by overlap.
Do they specifically target a range of zip codes or just rely on random number calling to do the selection for them. I'm assuming by 'overlap' you meant the latter.

Only reason I ask is in someplace like CA a sample bias toward the urban areas yields a bunch of Trotskyites and Maoists. A rural bias and even in CA you'd think you landed in the state of John Birchland.

I'm laughing, Hit. Some may say my life is pretty empty, but it's not quite so barren yet that I want to pore over the reams of data you'd like to see (smiley face; smiley face).

For the D vs. R weights, most use the figures from the previous general election when they analyze results for an upcoming general election, the data for the last mid-term when they look at mid-term polls. There may be circumstances (recessions, indictments, etc) that make that foolhardy, but it's the safest, most defensible route to take. Hard to know, then, how Qunnipiac came up with its D+18 for Ohio (or whatever the one-sided result was) which doesn't seem to jibe with anything.

Your questions assume there's widespread bias and fudging afoot. I'm sure it happens, but I truly believe it's rarer than you think. As with other businesses, a reputation for providing a high-quality product is uppermost. Most of the paid political research in the USA is eyes-only work done for individual candidates and campaigns, not for public view. Your earnings are therefore linked to your reputation and history of accuracy.

There's a human nature thing involved too. Even here at JOM, where polls are held in pretty low esteem, we all seem to applaud the accuracy of any that produce our desired outcome, that reveal the conservative candidate to be leading. I hope that the polls showing Obama ahead in the critical battleground states are wrong, wrong, wrong. If they are, though, I think it is more related to the obvious difficulty of measuring enthusiasm and voting avidity than it is to cheating.

--I think it is more related to the obvious difficulty of measuring enthusiasm and voting avidity than it is to cheating. --

Yeah, but... to H&R's point (I think) - how does this difficulty in achieving accuracy seemingly vanish in the last week before an election, when the polls (miraculously) close in on what turns out to be nearer to the actual results than the months of projections were showing?

And how many times have those last week 'improvements' taken the polls to stronger R numbers (reducing skew to D) vs. the other way around?

It does seem to me that the polls are consistently biased to D up to the election, and then BAM Rs start coming out the woodwork to declare themselves.

Maybe so, if you read between the lines, which is fair. I'm trying mostly to ask questions without drawing conclusions.

As with other businesses, a reputation for providing a high-quality product is uppermost.

True enough. But a pollster's reputation - measured on public results - is not about the reams of data you don't want to go through. Maybe campaigns and organizations have gone through that data to measure pollsters ability to accurately guage a race months before the election, but neither you nor I -- and certainly not the public at large -- knows what that data says.

So Quinnipiac can put out a poll on Oct 28 showing Mitt with a 2 point lead

"Quinnipiac edges Rasmussen in 2012 presidential election" can then be the headline ol' Q gets to use for the next four years, should things turn out to go their way.